The Death of Diversity: What Will Deglobalization Bring to Occidental Civilization?
Bourgeois diversity is a distraction tactic used by government and big business to rationalize the globalist-humanitarian consensus.
The more talk about bourgeois diversity, the less talk about economic equality.
Diversity is an ideological rationalization for the economic agendas of rootless globalist crony capitalism…
The commodification and castration of human laborers & human labor via exploitative mass migration and social dumping requires a legitimating ideology.
Diversity was invented in order to legitimize and justify the indiscriminate free flow of capital & of so-called ‘human capital.’
The social tensions inevitably created by the current economic consensus could not be resolved on the material level. This being so, they required an ideological rationalization.
Instead of the objective, dispassionate and evidence-based, case-by-case approach of enlightened liberalism, something stronger was needed. The material contradictions or conflicts were so strong, a very strong ideological panacea was expedient.
This is why the wealth-possessing bourgeois ideologues of the Far Center advocate not merely tolerating differences, but celebration.
But as is so commonly the case with ideology, the ideologues take good care to cover their tracks.
Diversity is ‘naturalized,’ and taken as a fact of nature.
Instead of being a contingent and historically-originated framing of the facts, it is taken as common sense; as though it were natural.
This is entirely necessary; as long as the illusion of the naturalness and commonsensicality of ‘diversity’ is taken for granted, it is impossible to take it as other than inevitable.
The fact is, however, that while differences may be a fact of life, and not intrinsically positive or negative, (i.e. not good or bad absent of context); yet, diversity is not, like differences, a fact of life. It is a value judgment, not a fact of life.
The positive undercurrents of the word ‘diversity’ connote an unmistakably clear preference for more difference, rather than less.
It is on this score, that it can be said that diversity is entirely non-existent.
I.e. differences may exist, but diversity is an intrinsically implausible method of framing differences. And why is this?
Because: surprise, surprise! Differences are not ‘good in general’ or ‘bad in general.’
This being so, only a renewal of liberal skepticism and empiricism can save the Occident from an indiscriminate moral relativism.
As the ‘contradictions’ or conflicts of globalization intensify, governments are likely to take at least small, incremental steps towards deglobalization. In turn, the legitimating ideology of bourgeois diversity may end up withering on the vine.
However, as material-institutional base & ideological-spiritual superstructure do not perfectly cohere & correspond…
A time-lag is more than possible.
Decades of moral, cultural, historical, aesthetic, epistemic relativism cannot easily be undone.
The indiscriminate fetishization of diversity of identity, diversity of morals, diversity of worldviews, of tastes, of values, is deeply rooted.
However, the deepening environmental crisis & well-nigh irreconcilable social conflicts & tensions are likely to force the hand of governments.
The bad news is, diversity will not survive the coming decades. The good news is, it can be replaced with something better.
The real danger is not that diversity & relativism will perdure, as ideological rationalizations of an exploitative economic system.
On the contrary, the more plausible danger is that diversity will be replaced with its mere opposite.
Both far right factions (white nationalist and Islamist) represent the mere opposite of diversity.
I.e. they attribute an indiscriminate and acontextual negative value judgment to differences, rather than a positive value judgment.
This being so, both ideologies are purely defensive, vacuous, & ‘reactionary’ in the strictest sense of the word.
They represent two corresponding material and spiritual / base & superstructural oppositional powers.
The material element is anti-capitalism, and also anti the imperialism practiced by big Western powers supporting the so-called ‘neoliberal’ or rootless globalist crony capitalist economic system.
As for the spiritual / superstructural element, both white nationalists and Islamists want a uniform and non-pluralistic society.
There is a risk that as the current economic system retreats via deglobalization, what will emerge is not a renewed liberalism of the case-by-case, contextual approach to differences; but rather a mere inversion of diversitarianism.
Such unitarianism would be deeply undesirable.
This is a key transitional point of economic transformation & concurrent ‘revaluation of all values…’
Comparable to post-WWII and the 1960s.
It’s very important, in such a context, to make sure that the death of diversity & of the economic system it serves to rationalize result in a renewal of individual liberty, & not its abject destruction.
The slow demise of diversity may well mean the death of relativism and the resurrection of moral universalism, of modernity.
But this is not inevitable.
Let’s make sure that there neither the indiscriminate celebration of differences nor the indiscriminate persecution of the Other will ever see the light of day in the coming age of freedom.